|Posted by The Editor on July 29, 2015 at 12:25 PM||comments (0)|
A useful article concerning attendance at the New Mass recently appeared on the website of the Avrillé Dominicans, which we quote from below. The full article may be founnd here: http://www.dominicansavrille.us/attendance-at-the-new-mass/
Is it permitted to take part in the New Mass?
Even if the New Mass is valid, it displeases God in so far as it is ecumenical and protestant. Besides that, it represents a danger for the faith in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. It must therefore be rejected. Whoever understands the problem of the New Mass must no longer assist at it, because he puts voluntarily his faith in danger, and, at the same time, encourages others to do the same in appearing to give his assent to the reforms.
How can a valid Mass displease God?
Even a sacrilegious Mass celebrated by an apostate priest to mock Christ can be valid. It is however evident that it offends God, and it would not be permitted to take part in it. In the same way, the Mass of a Greek Schismatic (valid and celebrated according a venerable rite) displeases God insofar as it is celebrated in opposition to Rome and to the unique Church of Christ.
Can one attend the New Mass however when it is celebrated in a worthy and pious manner by a Catholic priest with a faith that is absolutely certain?
It is not the celebrant who is called into question, but the rite that he is using. It is unfortunately a fact that the new rite has given very many Catholics a false notion of the Mass, which is closer to that of the protestant last supper than that of the Holy Sacrifice. The new Mass is one of the principal sources of the current crises of the faith. It is therefore imperative that we distance ourselves from it.
Can one assist at the new Mass in certain circumstances?
We must apply to the new Mass the same rules we use for the attendance at a non-Catholic ceremony. One can be present for family or professional reasons, but one behaves passively, and especially does not receive Holy Communion.
|Posted by The Editor on July 1, 2015 at 3:40 PM||comments (0)|
|Posted by The Editor on June 24, 2015 at 3:35 PM||comments (0)|
Bishop Faure recently visited the Resistance in Australia to administer the sacrament of confirmation to many souls who had been patiently waiting for last 18 months. Deo Gratias.
Some pictures of confirmations in Tynong can been found here.
A video of the start of confirmations and sermon at Brisbane can be seen below.
|Posted by The Editor on June 10, 2015 at 5:05 PM||comments (0)|
From the website REX! comes news about the Czech Resistance Pilgrimage which took place last weekend, to the shrine of St. John Nepomuk, a priest who was martyred in 1393 for refusing to break the seal of confession.
Fr. Martin Fuchs preached a sermon on the seal of confession to around 20 souls who were present at the Pilgrimage church for Mass on Sunday. An English translation of the sermon and some more photos can be seen here.
|Posted by The Editor on June 9, 2015 at 2:00 PM||comments (0)|
We have the Canadian Resistance faithful to thank for this excellent initiative, from which great good will surely come. More details can be found here:
...in the meantime, for those wishing to hear more about it from the people who first concieved this initiative, we recommend the excellent and very informative interview with "Ecclesia Militans Radio". As well as answering some questions and objections, the interview provides an interesting insight into the spirit of the Resistance faithful, a spirit which we belive is shared by the Resistance faithful around the world, and is for that reason if no other, well worth a listen.
Our Lady of Fatima, Pray for us!
|Posted by The Editor on June 8, 2015 at 2:25 PM||comments (0)|
From a correspondent in Ireland comes the following encouraging news:
There are currently three Resistance priests in Ireland. Fr. Bufe is joined by Fr. MacDonald, back from Australia, both of whom are in turn jonied by Fr. Giacomo Ballini (an Italian priest who had been stationed in Cork under Fr. Wailliez, and before that in Preston).
At the 11.00 Mass in Cork yesterday, Fr. Ballini explained his departure to the faithful, and handed out documentation to better explain what is going on in the SSPX and why he felt that he had no choice but to leave. Fr. Wailliez is reported to have gone down to the chapel shortly afterwards in a rage to change the locks on the church (why would that be necessary?) and otherwise prove himself as vindictive as possible.
Meanwhile, Fr. MacDonald offered Mass in Wexford yesterday for around 45 people, in the chapel currently used by the Resistance which was once used by Dom Marmion some 100 years ago. Three chapels: Wexford, Cashel (Tipperary) and Tralee (Kerry) are now lost to the SSPX and with the Resistance. This is in addition to the other Resistance chapels where Mass is regularly offered: Kesh (Fermanagh), Longford (where Fr. MacDonald will be offering regular Mass) and Dublin (at the Skylon Hotel, where Fr. Bufe will be offering Mass next Sunday at 10am).
Remember to pray for Fr. Ballini, and pray that more priests and faithful will have the courage to stand up to the modernism of the neo-SSPX and do likewise.
|Posted by The Editor on May 17, 2015 at 2:45 PM||comments (0)|
“We have just learned that the new [SSPX] prior of Fabregues has upped the ante with excommunications. The 83-year-old lady who was excommunicated (literally) by Fr. de la Motte for having welcomed Bishop Williamson into her home, Fr. Rousseau upped the ante by declaring that this excommunication would also stand were she to dare to welcome anyone at all connected with the Resistance to her home.
Apart from the odious denial of sacraments to an elderly person in need, there is the juridical absurdity of such a sanction. What does Fr. Rousseau mean by “welcome into her home”: if Fr. Pinaud stopped by for a cup of tea on the veranda, would she be excommunicated for that?
What does he mean by “resistance person”? Is there a black list of bishops, priests, brothers and laymen who are considered “people of the resistance”? Are Enoch and Eli on it?
Beyond this aberration and this and inhumanity on the part of an SSPX prior, we see a very dangerous spirit emerging, the spirit of a shop which no longer admits the possibility of any other way of eternal salvation than Bishop Fellay, the SSPX and its new spirit.
An SSPX priest who is currently in a very important post in the French district recognised that such a punishment was falling on the congregation.
Outside the Church no salvation! That’s a dogma, it’s absolutely true!
Outside Bishop Fellay and the SSPX no salvation – that is an obvious schism. Think about it.”
Post Script - We also learn via NonPossumus that Fr. de la Motte was replaced mid-year because he recently left the SSPX to go and join the local conciliar diocese. He is not the first. How many more, before Bishop Fellay saves them the trouble...?
|Posted by The Editor on May 12, 2015 at 2:55 PM||comments (0)|
What is the SSPX reaction to the departure of Frs. MacDonald and King?
From a reader comes the following:
'At St. Joseph's [in London] it was announced that: "Father King had walked out
on his parish responsibilities, leaving [Father Vandendale] to look after the whole
of Central England single-handedly." '
Given that Fr. King made sure to inform both Fr. Morgan and Bishop Fellay in advance of his intention to leave the SSPX, this is somewhat dishonest, to put it mildly. Notice also the lack of any hint of why Fr. King left - he just walked out, the implication being 'for no good reason.' This despite the declaration which Fr. King made public. As for "parish responsibilities", surely a responsibility towards the truth and towards the salvation of souls must rank highest amongst these, to say nothing of the fact that very many of his former parishioners are now (still) his current parishioners, having followed him out of the SSPX.
Regarding Fr. MacDonald, in the latest district newsletter, Fr. Morgan writes:
" Fr MacDonald’s departure
On a sadder note, I regret to announce the departure of Father Edward
MacDonald from the District just after Easter following his decision to
undertake an independent apostolate in Australia."
Once again, note what is not said, and what is implied thereby. Fr. MacDonald is currently, to use his own words, "with the Resistance in Australia." Why is there no mention of the Resistance by Fr. Morgan? Why is there no mention by Fr. Morgan of the crucial reason why Fr. MacDonald left? Why Fr. Morgan lead the ususpecting reader to believe that Fr. MacDonald simply left on a selfish whim, for no reason - is this not uncharitable as well as dishonest? Given that Fr. MacDonald decided specifically to go and help Fr. Chazal and Fr. Picot, and that (again, in his own words) he did so at the request of Fr. Ortiz, is it not extremely misleading to say that he left to undertake "an independent ministry" - as though Fr. MacDonald simply could not be bothered to put up with obedience and superiors any longer?
Why the lack of honesty and candour? What is there to hide? Ironically, by going to such great lengths to avoid mentioning the Resistance or the crisis in the SSPX, Fr. Morgan has only drawn everyone's attention to it still further. It shows that the actions of Fr. MacDonald and Fr. King have dealt a serious blow to the "everything's-alright" / "everything's-still-the-same" version of 'reality' subscribed to by those who are living in denial. More worryingly, however, is the adoption by the SSPX of the sort of "spin" beloved of corrupt political parties and secular media. Let your "yes" be "yes" and your "no" be "no".
|Posted by The Editor on May 11, 2015 at 3:25 PM||comments (0)|
|Posted by The Editor on May 6, 2015 at 12:35 PM||comments (0)|
We refer the reader to an article which appeared a week ago in the French weekly magazine "Famille Chrettienne" ('Christian Family' - a magazine which is not even 'conservative novus ordo' - it is widely regarded as liberal even by the standards of the Novus Ordo!), a translation of which can be found here or on our Reference Materials page.
As one might expect, most of it is not "news", but it does contain some snippets of interview with Fr. Christian ("the-Jews-did-not-commit-Deicide") Bouchacourt, who takes the opportunity to praise Pope Francis as being very helpful in the matter of the SSPX recognition. Remember that it was Fr. Bouchacourt who first asked for the recognition back in 2011. He asked the then Cardinal Bergoglio (now Pope Fancis), the man, he says, "...who made things easier [for the SSPX to be recognised]." "Without him, it would have been impossible."
There are also some snippets of interview with Archbishop Pozzo in which, amongst other things, he says that the "journey" of "dialogue" between the SSPX and Rome "is continuing."
Would anyone like to ask Fr. Daniel "Resistance-to-What?" Themann what this all means?
Would anyone like to ask Fr. Jacques Emily, who insisted that "There is no accord and there will be no accord!" (and who said that anyone who says otherwise must be "of such bad faith" see here) what this might mean?
Would someone like to ask Bishop Fellay, who said in talks in England, Ireland and elsewhere that everything is over between the SSPX and Rome, and that the talks are at an end, what this might mean?
Support Our Apostolate!
Help us to expose the subversion within the SSPX! Please consider making a small paypal donation to The Recusant.
"Viva Cristo Rey!"